All Activity

I just want to chime in to say meeting Joel was great. He's thoughtful and friendly in person and he gave what was definitely one of the best papers at the conference on the films of the Dardennes as parable, through Paul Ricouer's understanding of the parable form. It was insightful and compelling, enhancing my already healthy appreciation for the directors. Thanks, Joel!

John Malkovich is playing Poirot!
I'm thrilled. Suchet is great (though he has his limits, as Queering Agatha Christie--an excellent recent study--points out). But, since Finney, the major trend has been toward more genial, friendly portrayals of Poirot (Ustinov the avuncular, Suchet the lonely, Branagh the soulful). I've come to admire the weird, alien, unlikable Poirot Finney gave us in Murder on the Orient Express, and I'm really hoping Malkovich brings back some of that spikiness.
EDIT: Here's our thread for the 2017 Murder on the Orient Express.

I know this is probably too late, but seeing that Evan responded with thoughtful remarks on ANATOMY OF A MURDER reminded me that there that film depicts serious concerns regarding rape, social views of victims of sexual assault, and how it is treated in the criminal justice system.
Check the thread on that film for both his and my thoughts.

Since moving to St Andrews, I've had the pleasure of meeting a few A&F members face to face. First, Joel Clarkson is also in the Institute for Theology, Imagination and the Arts, so we connected last fall; he's finishing up his masters and I believe will be doing a PhD in ITIA as well. Then, a few weeks ago, I met Anders Bergstrom in Toronto during the Religion & Film Conference; he presented an insightful paper on Mad Men and the documentaries of Adam Curtis, and it was great to discuss film theory and grab a drink at TIFF Lightbox. Today, I met Brian Duignan and his lovely family as they visit friends in Scotland and were able to come by St Andrews; we had a great conversation about life as ex-pats and the wonderful films of the Dardennes.
The Internet can be terrible, but it can also be good. I'm thankful the connections this A&F forum has fostered.

Perhaps this thread is the place to suggest this: I've joined a couple forums where new members need to have one or more posts approved by a moderator before they can post freely. (On CriterionForum.org it's five posts, but one is probably enough.) Seems like a good way to avoid spam without raising the barrier to entry too high.

Disney considering welcoming back Pixar co-founder John Lasseter after allegations of unwanted touching: report
Executives at Walt Disney Co. have discussed bringing animation guru John Lasseter back to the company in a new role that would reduce his managerial power but allow him to retain creative influence, according to a person familiar with the matter.
Those discussions come as the end of Mr. Lasseter’s six-month leave, taken following accusations of unwelcome hugging and other touching, approaches on May 21. So far, Disney has given no indication whether or not Mr. Lasseter will return. It is also possible that Monday will pass with no decision. . . .
Wall Street Journal, May 16

For some reason that Chaw review leads me to think this film is *also* going to give us a back-story, not just for the Kessel Run, but for the bit in The Empire Strikes Back where Threepio says to Han, "Sir, I don't know where your ship learned to communicate, but it has the most peculiar dialect."

Noted...although I was assuming Penn's limited time on screen in the theatrical cut dovetailed with some script portions that included his character but were cut from the theatrical version.
Seems to me that someone around here (Ryan H?) had said they had read the original script. Ryan?

Brian D wrote:
: Wow, that is exciting news. Especially given Sean Penn's statement that this film was a lot better as originally scripted than it ended up being after the edit for theater release.
I would caution against the assumption that "more screen time" equals "closer to the script". Malick is kind of notorious for telling actors to just ignore the script *on set*, let alone whatever he decides to do with it in the editing room.

Buckeye Jones wrote:
: There was a bit too much Guardians of the Galaxy screen time, though I suppose the story demanded it to be so given the third act and its machinations. ﻿
Ironically, one of the things I hated about Infinity War was how it effed up the Guardians, which had heretofore been one of my favorite Marvel movie properties. Among other things, they simply didn't have James Gunn's touch here -- and I can only wonder how Gunn will pick up the pieces once this Avengers storyline is over.
That being said, I did love the way Thor kept calling Rocket Raccoon "Rabbit".

Relentlessly okay, thirded.
A lot of really inert dialogue. The critical problem for me is that Thanos is not a compelling character, and the relationships intended to imbue his prodigious chin with pathos are not well scripted. A similar thing happens with the Iron Man/Spiderman relationship, which doesn't quite connect the emotional dots. There just aren't any stakes present.
A telling flaw is the first Guardians of the Galaxy sequence, which lacks the crackle and pop of their film installments. This makes me think that had Gunn directed this entire film, it would have been more coherent and incisive. He is a much better director.